SKIN INJURY ASSESSMENT 265 REFERENCES (1) J. W. Feather, K. S. Ryarr, J. B. Dawson, J. A. Cotterill, D. J. Barker, and D. J. Ellis, Reflec- tance spectrophotometric quantificarion of skin colour changes induced by topical corticosteroid prep- arations, Br. J. DermatoL, 106, 437 (1982). (2) B. L. Diffey, R. J. Oliver, and P.M. Farr, A portable instrument for quantifying erythema induced by ultraviolet radiation, Br. •. DermatoL, 111, 663 (1984). (3) S. W. Babulak, L. D. Rhein, D. D. Scala, F. A. Simion, and G. L. Grove, Quantirarion of ery- rhema in a soap chamber test using the Minolta Chroma (Reflectance) Meter: Comparison of instru- mental results with visual assessments, J. $oc. Cosmet. Chem., 37, 475 (1986). (4) P. Bierring and P. H. Andersen, Skin reflectance spectrophotometry, Photodermatology, 4, 167 (1987). (5) T. Nose, A. Uchiyama, and K. Tsurumi, Study on the ultraviolet eryrhema in guinea-pigs, Jpn. J. PharmacoL, 46, 296 (1988). (6) J. C. $eitz and C. G. Whirmore, Measurement of erythema and tanning responses in human skin using a tristimulus colorimeter, Dermatologica, 177, 70 (1988). (7) W. Westerhof, O. Estevez-Uscanga, A. Kammeyer, J. Meens, M. Durocq, and I. Cair, Quantitative skin reflectance chromameter measurements of erythema and pigmentation response in human volun- teers of different skin types irradiated with solar simulated UV, J. Invest. Dermato/., 91, 385 (1989). (8) K. P. Wilhelm, C. Surber, and H. I. Maibach, Quantification of sodium lauryl sulfate irritant der- matitis in man: Comparison of four techniques: skin color reflectance, transepidermal water loss, laser Doppler flow measurement and visual scores, Arch. Dermatol. Res., 281, 293 (1989). (9) W. Westerhof, O. Estevez-Uscanga, A. Candido, H. Coevoet, and A. Kammeyer, Separation of erythema and pigmentation measurements by means of a skin reflectance chromameter, C/in. Res., 37, 736A (1989). (10) W. Westerhof, O. Estevez-Uscanga, A. Candido, H. Coevoet, and A. Kammeyer, Separation of erythema and pigmentation measurements by means of a skin reflectance chromameter, J. Invest. Dermatol., 92, 540 (1989). (11) K. P. Wilhelm and H. I. Maibach, Skin color reflectance measurements for objective quantification of erythema in human beings, J. Am. Academy Dermatol., 21, 1306 (1989). (12) E. Berardesca and H. I. Maibach, Alternative nonvisual methods quantitating skin test response, Immun. Allergy Clinics North Am., 9, 597 (1988). (13) Minolta Corporation, 101 Williams Dr., Ramsey, New Jersey 07446. (14) D. D. Marlow, M. M. Mershon, L. W. Mitcheltree, G. P. Jaax, and J. P. Petrali, Sulfur mustard induced skin injury in hairless guinea pigs, J. Toxicol., Cutaneous Ocul. Toxicol., 9(3), (1990). (15) G. Wyszecki and W. S. Stilles, Color Science: Concepts and Methods, Quantitative Data and Formulas, 2nd ed. (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1982) pp. 165-168. 16) R. W. G. Hunt, Measuring Colour (Ellis Horwood Limited, Chichester, England, 1987), pp. 32-130. 17) Vetalar TM, 100 mg/ml. Park Davis, Division of Warner-Lambert Co., Morris Plains, NJ 07950. 18) Rompan, 20 mg/ml. Mobay Corp., Animal Health Division, Shawnee, KS 66201. 19) J. H. Draize, G. Woodard, and H. O. Calvery, J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 83, 377 (1944). (20) J. A. Draize, Appraisal of the Safety of Chemicals in Foods, Drugs, and Cosmetics--Dermal Toxicity (Assoc of Food and Drug Officials of the US, Topeka, Kansas, 1965), pp. 49-52. (21) Method of Testing Primary Irritant Substances (16 CRF, Ch. II, Part 1500.41., 1 Jan 1987), pp. 348-349. (22) J. L. Hintze, Number Cruncher Statistical System (Dr. Jerry L. Hintze, Kaysville, Utah, 1987), pp. 167-190.

j. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 41, 267-273 (September/October 1990) The evaluation of gloves for protection against cosmetic ingredients ANDREW SAVAIDES, THOMAS SCHULTZ, and LUDWIG SALCE, Dr. Everett C. McDonough Research Laboratories, ZOTOS International Incorporated, Darien, CT 06820-1005. Received August 16, 1990. Synopsis The efficiency of vinyl, plastic, and latex type gloves was evaluated based upon the resistance permeation by the following cosmetic ingredients: ammonium thioglycolate (AMTG), glycerylmonothioglycolate (GMTG), and hydrogen peroxide. The permeation glove resistance studies included immersion of the middle glove finger containing 10 ml deionized water into 19% GMTG, 12% AMTG, and 2.5% hy- drogen peroxide. Aliquots were analyzed by HPLC and UV/visible. Quantitative HPLC and UV/visible assay results indicate that latex-type gloves exhibit the highest perme- ation resistance towards these cosmetic ingredients. Thus, with proper use of latex gloves, salon technicians and cosmetologists may limit their exposure to these ingredients. BACKGROUND In the practice of the art of hair care salon operators are often exposed to products that contain reactive ingredients, that is, the cosmetic compositions that contain the mate- rials that permit color development, permanent waving, and hair bleaching. While with occasional use of these products there is a minimal possibility of a type of contact dermatitis to the client, the cosmeticJan can often be in contact several times a day, and in rare instances, the dermis may become irritated. It has been reported that some of the chemical agents used in the practice of personal and beauty care can cause varying types of contact dermatitis (1-3). The most no- torious of these chemicals are constituents of detergents--for example, the salts and ethers of lauryl sulfates. fragrance compositions, dyestuffs such as derivatives of phen- ylene diamines, and mercaptans used in permanent waving. The appearance of irritancy has been documented for the practioners of the art, beauty salon operators. In some cases the clients of the salon, who experience sporadic contact with these materials, may be atopic and hence susceptible to sensitization responses. In 1983 Storrs (4) indicated that the active ingredients in acid and alkaline permanent- waving compositions, GMTG or AMTG, are allergens, although the incidence is low, less than 0.01-0.02% as determined from epidemiological data presented by various permanent wave suppliers [presented to the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Board of the CTFA (5,6)]. In rare occurances the people who perform numerous permanent-waving processes each day can become sensitized. Storrs (7) supports the advice of some pro- 267