1955 SEMINAR DISCUSSION 273 surfaces that are reasonably alike, treated according to a statistically de- signed experiment, will give us the necessary information. And we will not hesitate to use the information in our advertising. Summary of Discussions on Mechanism of Antiperspirant and Deodorant Activity, Afternoon of September 15, 1955 W. G. FRv. I)V.•.L (Lambert-Hudnut Division of Warner- Lambert Pharmaceutical Company, St. Louis 6, Mo.) My remarks today fall in line with what the speakers have told you plus some added observations. My remarks deal with practical work actually carried out in the axilla on antiperspirant effect, deodorant effect and num- bers of bacteria in the axillary area. Antiperspirant effect in the axilla is possible but not complete and this from multiple applications rather than from one application of a product. As a matter of fact, one application has tended to increase the amount of perspiration. Data obtained in vivo on 13 people using multiple applica- tions of a 15 per cent aluminum sulfate antiperspirant cream, when evalu- ated by a statistician, showed significant alteration in axillary perspiration on the basis of those applications. Maximum diminution of perspiration in a treated axilla was 60 per cent. As stated by Dr. Herrmann earlier, we have asymetric perspiration in some areas. For an individual, we found that there were definite ratios of left to right axilla, varying from one to one to almost double the amount of perspiration in the right axilla as compared to the left. For work in this field, it was necessary to screen a number of subjects to eliminate those that did not perspire sufficiently since we were interested in obtaining at least 100 rag. of perspiration during a time inter- val of fifteen minutes to one-half hour. To summarize this portion dealing with antiperspirant effect, multiple applications of an aluminum sulfate product are required to produce some effect and that effect is not complete suppression of perspiration. Deodorant effect studies conducted in our plant showed that a number of people had no odor in the axilla. Actual sniffing of the axillary area was carried out and odor levels correlated with those obtained by swabbing the axillary area with a cotton ball. The cotton ball after use as a swab was placed in a 1-oz. glass jar and stoppered with a lid from which the liner was removed. Sniffing of these jars within an hour after taking the swab cor- related with odor values determined directly in the axilla. Judges of odor levels required but about five minutes of training. Odor levels mentioned

274 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS by Dr. Shelley were no odor, faint, strong and very strong. Dr. Gee in an article in Soap and Sanitary Chemicals had a greater number of odor levels. We had four levels 1, 2, 3 and 4 that would agree with Dr. Shelley's levels, 1 being the no odor level. Preliminary work on untreated axilla indicated that odor levels left and right were the same. Thus, one axilla could be used as a control when the other was treated. Our data covering a six hour test period showed effec- tiveness of commercial deodorants. For longer periods our subjects were not under our control. Controlled conditions are essential for the collec- tion of valid data. With respect to immediate deodorization of an odorous axilla, both per- fumed and unperfumed products of aluminum sulfate were tried. In the majority of cases, the area was deodorized in five minutes and in all cases in fifteen minutes. The third point of discussion is the effect of axillary bacteria in producing odors. As stated before, we have not found all axilla to be odorous if not treated with a deodorant. In a number of cases the odor returns to an axilla within fifteen minutes after washing with soap and water. Bacterial counts obtained by swabbing the axilla according to a routine procedure varied from 5000 to over a million. Odor could not be correlated with bac- terial count. In a few cases, a subject would not bathe the axillary area for five days. The bacterial count in one case rose to 1,200,000 but no axillary odor was present. This same subject, however, has appeared on tests and pronounced odors have been found. From a cosmetic standpoint, the use of a deodorant is indicated since we do not know when we may offend. W. S. Gu•4p (The Givaudan Corporation, Delawanna, N.J.) We have heard so much from Klarmann and Shelley about axillary deodoran% including hexachlorophene, that I can restrict my comments to a few remarks. First, I would like to ask Shelley a question. He has shown the presence of eccrine and apocrine glands in the axilla, and also of sebaceous glands. A number Of investigators have stated that the secretions of the sebaceous glands might contribute to axillary odor. In one of his earlier papers, Shelley has expressed a similar opinion and I wonder whether he still believes that some of the axillary odor might come from the sebaceous gland or whether he thinks now that this odor must be attributed more or less exclusively to bacterial degradation of apocrine sweat. Concerning the action of aluminum salts, I recently had a chance to talk with Hopf and his chief associate in Hamburg, Germany, where they are in