A STUDY OF THE DEODORIZING PROPERTIES OF CHLOROPHYLL IN DENTIFRICES* BY Lores C. M.D. New York 24, N.Y. FEW SUBJECTS in the annals of cosmetic chemistry have ever been as controversial as the deodor- izing properties of chlorophyll, chlo- rophyllins and derived com- pounds. This study will bring facts based on an investigation which was con- ducted with the objective to deter- mine whether chlorophyll has any merit as a deodorizing agent when incorporated into a tooth paste. I. ORAL USES The use of chlorophyll in dental products is older than is commonly believed. We remember being told that a chlorophyll mouthwash was on sale in the East of France fifty years ago it was still in use locally and appreciated less than twenty years ago. It had been com- pounded by a stomatologist and was available in most pharmacies within a radius of 30 miles. In the late twenties, the manu- facturer of an opalescent and slightly fluorescent pink mouth- * Presented at the December 6, 1951, Meeting, New York City. wash with a badiane-geraniol flavor introduced a peppermin t-chlorophyll mouthwash, with a stronger flavor and taste than that of the first one. Just as the first one had been for many years, the second mouthwash containing chlorophyll very quickly became a best-seller, and was dis- tributed all over Europe. Both of these mouthwashes contained quite reasonable amounts of chlorophyll, which was obtained first from spin- ach, later from alfalfa by extraction in ethyl alcohol and filtration. The extract was mixed with the other components of the product which already had an alcohol base. These two products had a wholesome resid- ual flavor and a strong deodorizing action which outlasted the masking action of the essential oils they con- tained. II. WOUNDS AND SURGICAL CASES The local deodorizing action of chlorophyll was published for the first time by Burgi, of Berne, Switz- erland, in five papers published in 1932. He found that wounds treated with solutions of 2 to 10 per cent chlorophyll lost their putrid odor and healed faster. Most prob-

2 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS ably, chlorophyll acted as both a deodorizing agent, a catalytic stimu- lant of the growth of normal cells and phagocytosis, and also had a slight bacteriostatic action against such micro-organisms as staphylo- coccus aureus and streptococcus hemolyticus. At about the same time in 1938 in this country, a patent was issued to Dr. Benjamin Gruskin for a .chlorophyll preparation for the treatment of wounds, which prep- aration among other features had a marked local deodorizing action. He later obtained a British patent for his formula. Finally, in 1947, Bowers gave more evidence of the local deodorizing action of chloro- phyll in surgical cases. From the history and literature iust summarized, it can be deduced that there are established facts which seem to indicate that chloro- phyll and its derivatives absorb the odors emitted by tissues with which they are put in contact, for various periods of time. III. PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGA- TION The purpose of this investigation was specifically to ascertain whether chlorophyll added to a tooth paste formula would impart to it local deodorizing properties, and there- fore remove odors due to local causes, and also delay their forma- tion. Two dentifrices were simultane- ously tested on the same subjects. They had an identical base: insol- uble sodium metaphosphate, cal- cium phosphate, sodium lauryl sul- fate, gum, glycerin, and water. One of them contained, added to this identical basic formula common to both, 0.1 per cent of an active water- soluble sodium copper chlorophyllin. IV. SELECTION OF SUBJECTS Fifty subjects were carefully se- lected to participate in this study 29 men and 21 women. The selec- tion was the result of preliminary odor measurement tests of the oral cavity of more than 100 subjects. Special care was taken to eliminate subjects whose mouth odor was not mostly due to local causes. The intensity of the initial mouth odor of local origin was in the average range or higher than the average range in 47 subjects, and slightly lower than average in three subjects only. The selected subjects were then given a schedule of the tests, such instructions to the effect that on the two days of the test, from the time they got up to the last appointment of their test schedule, they did not eat any breakfast, not even orange juice, nor eat candy, nor chew gum or tobacco, nor drink liquor or any other liquid, nor smoke. They did not brush their teeth or rinse their mouth with any liquid. Women did not wear lipstick. One test-free day was set between the two test days for two reasons: 1. Not to impose the strain of two consecutive breakfastless days. 2. To enable the subjects to use