254 JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE 6.2 6.43 6.23 5• • 5.05 5.18 Baseline 8 hrs 12 hrs 24 hrs 48 hrs [] 1% Deofix ß Placebo Control Baseline 8 Hours 12 Hours Deofix TM Control Deofix TM Control Deofix TM Control Mean Odor Score 6.2 6.43 4.58 5.05 4.77 5.4 Mean Sample Diff. +Cl • -- 0.47 + 0.37 0.63 + 0.44 Signed Rank p-value: -- 0.0122 2 0.0083 2 Estimates % Differences -- 9.24% 11.73% Panel Size 15 15 15 24 Hours 48 Hours Deofix TM Control Deofix TM Control Mean Odor Score 4.6 5.53 5.18 6.23 Mean Sample Diff. +Cl • 0.93 + 0.67 1.05 + 0.67 Signed Rank p-value: 0.0075 2 0.0079 2 Estimates % Differences 16.87% 16.84% Panel Size 15 15 Analysis of Variance Results Treatment Effect D.0010 3 Interaction D. 1841 Overall Treatment Means Deofix TM - 4.78 Control - 5.55 • - 95% Confidence Intervals 2 _ Significant Difference Favoring Deofix TM (Signed Rank Test) 3 _ Significant Overall Difference Favoring Deofix TM (Analysis of Variance) Figure 2. Comparison of malodor scores (1% Deofix TM vs placebo control). ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY The antioxidant activity of Deofix TM was determined by measuring its effect on the coupled oxidation of carotene with linoleic acid, using the method of Marco (10) with minor modifications. Approximately 0.1 mg of beta-carotene was dissolved in 10 ml of chloroform. Two tenths of a milliliter of the carotene-chloroform solution was pipetted into a boiling flask that contained 20 mg of purified linoleic acid and 200 mg of Tween-40. After removal of the chloroform with N2, 50 ml of double-distilled water was added to the flask with vigorous swirling. Five-milliliter aliquots of this emulsion were

USE OF DEOFIX TM IN DEODORANT PRODUCTS 255 6.7___ 6.58 4.85 6.12 5.73 ... 5.63 Baseline 8 hrs 12 hrs 24 hrs 48 hrs 130.3% Triclosan ß 1.0% Deofix Baseline 8 Hours 12 Hours Triclosan Deofix TM Triclosan Deofix TM Triclosan Deofix TM Mean Odor Score 6.7 6.58 5.38 4.85 5.73 5.37 Mean Sample Diff. _+CP .... 0.53 + 0.46 -0.37 + 0.62 Signed Rank p-value: --- 0.0379 2 0.2683 Estimates % Differences -- -11.00% -6,83% Panel Size 15 15 15 24 Hours 48 Hours , Triclosan Deofix TM Triclosan Deofix TM Mean Odor Score 6.12 5.63 6.52 6.13 Mean Sample Diff. +CP -0.48 + 0.42 -0.38 + 0.51 Signed Rank p-value: 0.0411 2 0.2435 Estimates % Differences -8.58% -6.25% Panel Size 15 15 Analysis of Variance Results Treatment Effect 0.0366 3 Interaction 0.5000 Overall Treatment Means •Triclosan-5.94 DeofixTM-5.50 • - 95% Confidence Intervals 2 _ Significant Difference Favoring Deofix TM (Signed Rank Test) 3 _ Significant Overall Difference Favoring Deofix TM (Analysis of Variance) Figure 3. Comparison of malodor scores (0.3% Triclosan vs 1.0% DeofixT•4). placed in tubes that contained Deofix TM in 2 ml of ethanol, to a final concentration of 100 ppm antioxidant solution. The tubes were stoppered and placed in a water bath at 50øC. Readings were taken at 20-minute intervals for 130 minutes. Ethanol was used as a negative control and butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as a positive control. Both Deofix TM and BHA exhibited almost comparable levels of antioxidant activity, lasting the full 130 minutes of the study. Results are presented in Figure 5 (11). Cyclic voltametry was used to measure the ease of electrochemical oxidation and reduction of Deof'nc TM. The experiment was designed to demonstrate whether the antioxidant effects of