150 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS traced to the days of Pliny in the first century before the birth of Christ (1). Lanolin as we know it now had its birth in the centrifuge of two Ger- man scientists, Brown and Liebrich, who prepared the first refined neu- tral wool grease and obtained a patent on the process in the year 1882(2). These researchers are also credited with conferring the name lanolin on their refined hydrous product. Up until World War I the United States depended to a great extent on the importation of lanolin from Germany. At the start of the war these supplies became unavailable. This short- age led to the rapid growth of the lanolin industry in this country. In the years since First World War, a boom has taken place in the use of lanolin and, more particularly, of its derivatives. The trend toward development of the newer derivatives of lanolin comes from a desire to create new materials from the already proved valuable lanolin--new products more specific in function, more versatile in use and more es- thetically elegant than lanolin. By fractionation and by chemical reac- tion, such as ethoxylation, new derivatives are created, laboratory and clinically tested, and finally judged in consumer use to demonstrate their worth in the fields of cosmetics and dermatology. INCIDENCE OF DERMATITIS ATTRIBUTED TO LANOLIN Following the increasing wide spread use of the material, instances of cutaneous reaction were discovered and presumed to be caused by lanolin it is only natural that dermatologists and allergists would at- tempt to study this phenomenon. Among the first in this country to report cases of allergy attributable to lanolin were Ramirez and Eller (3) ( one case) and Sulzberger and Morse (4) (two cases). Sezary (8) made a similar report of three cases in France. Bonnerie (6) in 1939 reported one case in 2358 patients thoroughly investigated in Copenhagen. Ellis (7) later reported a case of allergic contact dermatitis due to wool fat and cholesterol. Schwarzfeld (8), in reporting on some ten cases sensi- tive to lanolin and Aquaphor* (a lanolin ester and alcohol absorption base), felt that the Ellis work gave some physicians the impression aller- gic reaction to lanolin was rather common. No statement in the Ellis report could be so construed. Sulzberger and Lazar (9) in reporting on four patients reacting to lanolin made the statement that this type of reaction "occurs surprisingly rarely." Sulzberger et al. (10) in later studies found 12 lanolin-sensitive patients out of some 1048 allergy pa- * Duke Laboratories, Inc., Stamford, Conn.

LANOLIN ALLERGY? 151 tients--an incidence of 1.1% in this select population. Warshaw (11) in a report continuing this study added three more lanolin-sensitive pa- tients discovered at the New York Skin and Cancer Unit plus seven other patients from private practice. Hjorth (12) in Denmark described 21 lanolin-sensitive patients out of 25,000 allergy patients examined over a twenty year period or, in this select population of allergy cases, an incidence of lanolin sensitivity of less than 0.1%. It must be stressed that in this situation, as in the case of Sulzberger's patients, he was dealing not with normal healthy indi- viduals but rather with individuals with predisposition to sensitivity. Truter (13) in reporting on one case of dermal reaction to lanolin held that, from the dermatological literature, it was apparent that cutaneous hypersensitiv/ty to lanolin is "extremely uncommon." In 1955 Baer et al. (14) claimed to have observed 28 lanolin-sensitive patients out of 637 tested. Then in 1962 Calnan (15) reported 11 cases. A recent report by Wereide (16) in Oslo merits consideration because of the unusual test procedure used and the broad conclusions reached. He tested 270 eczema patients with anhydrous lanolin, Eucerin* (7 per cent lanolin alcoholst in soft paraffin) and mixtures of the two. In each test 5% of salicylic acid was added. He reported two reactions to the lanolin and three to Eucerin but 15 to the mixture of the two he con- cluded that lanolin sensitivity was common in eczema patients. It is well recognized that single materials may be innocuous by themselves but toxic in combination. However, one can't help but suspect the possi- bility Wereide observed some other kind of primary irritation due to the rigor of the test or a possible synergistic phenomenon rather than a true lanolin sensitivity. Carney (17) reported that in fifteen years he had seen only one proved case of lanolin sensitivity. Klauder and Ellis (18) reported five cases in private practice. Orentreich (19) in treating a series of some 154 der- matological cases with the oil soluble liquid fraction of lanolin and prepara- tions made from it found no instances of intolerance. He did report one case discovered in routine patch testing at the Hair Clinic in N. Y. (20). Masters (21), in discussing cosmetic allergies, felt that lanolin and its derivatives are not primary irritants and that allergic manifestations to their use are small. In the regulations issued following the color addi- tive legislation which were published in 1963, lanolin is included in the * Beiersdorf & Co. A. G. t Superhartolan-Croda, Ltd.