Titre : |
Overview of basic cosmetic safety |
Type de document : |
texte imprimé |
Auteurs : |
Craig Weiss, Auteur |
Année de publication : |
2012 |
Article en page(s) : |
p. 17-19 |
Note générale : |
Bibliogr. |
Langues : |
Anglais (eng) |
Catégories : |
Contamination microbienne Cosmétiques -- Aspect sanitaire Cosmétiques -- Toxicologie Industrie cosmétique -- Etats-Unis Substances dangereuses -- Mesures de sécurité Tests de toxicité
|
Index. décimale : |
668.5 Parfums et cosmétiques |
Résumé : |
First and foremost we need to consider that at the time of this writing, there is a very loose cosmetic safety standard in the US; cosmetic products shall be 'generally recognised as safe', or GRAS. The cosmetic industry adopted internal standards for safety ; a product of this class should not be irritating, sensitising or contaminated with microorganisms. This article will focus on the US market and recent trends in safety testing.
First, let me define a few of the most utilised safety testing techniques in use today. |
Note de contenu : |
- IN VITRO SAFETY TESTING : Bacterial reverse mutagenicity testing (Ames) - Cell culture irritancy testing - Hen's egg chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM) assay
- EX VIVO SAFETY TESTING
- HUMAN CLINICAL SAFETY TESTING : Forty-eight hour patch test - Human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT) - Safety in use studies
- SAFETY TESTING PROGRAMMES : Raw material safety testing - Finished goods safety testing
- NANOMATERIAL SAFETY TESTING : Minimum toxicity testing for nanomaterials should include |
Permalink : |
https://e-campus.itech.fr/pmb/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=15781 |
in PERSONAL CARE EUROPE > Vol. 5, N° 4 (09/2012) . - p. 17-19