Skin Absorption - 60% Claim (False)

[Guest guest]

Is the chemical Hydrophilic or Lipophilic .. Lipophilic chemicals will

penetrate better.

 

Size of the molecules ..

 

[Dave:] Butch, thank you for a thorough and objective explanation of this

issue. I knew there had to be someone out there who had the facts.

 

The statement this so-called " expert " made shows that s/he is far

from being an expert. Martin's post is one folks should pay close

attention to ..

 

[Dave:] In so many ways nothing has changed since the days of snake oil -

except that for now, thanks to the Internet, we have world-wide

dissemination and comparison of information. Sure helps, doesn’t it? As

far as claims go, back when motorized transportation was little more than

the hobby of some eccentric inventors, some “expert” proved that the human

body could not withstand speeds of more than 30 miles an hour, and above 45

mph would actually be shredded by the incredible forces.

 

 

--

 

 

Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release 10/1/2006

 

 

 

--

 

 

Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release 10/1/2006

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Dawn .. Miranda (?) .. other good folks ..

 

> I think it depends on the size of the molecules in the

> ingredients...some molecules are too big to be absorbed

> very deep.

 

You are absolutely correct. Primarily, two factors control the rate of

a particular chemical's passage through the skin: They are:

 

Is the chemical Hydrophilic or Lipophilic .. Lipophilic chemicals will

penetrate better.

 

Size of the molecules .. small molecules penetrate faster.

 

Also .. the delivery system is important:

 

1. High concentration of chemicals with small molecules .. i.e., not

diluted .. will penetrate better. We MUST pay close attention

to proper/safe dilution of EO.

 

2. Penetration enhancers .. basically, they disrupt the skin surface

and cause faster penetration. This is also true of diseased or broken

skin .. penetration of harmful chemicals will be enhanced. So .. we

MUST not use EO on broken skin.

 

3. Area for absorption .. increased area causes increased absorption.

So .. we should try to reduce the area of application because we are

flirting with sensitization if we do otherwise.

 

There are many, many, many, many other variables that are considered

when testing for transdermal absorption .. these variables are so wide in

scope that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make broad statements .. such as 60% of

this or that will penetrate. Testing is necessarily narrow in scope and

in all cases its conducted by labs under very controlled conditions ..

and funded by pharmaceutical companies for the purpose of finding a safe

and efficient delivery method for a " particular " chemical for a

" particular purpose " . To say that the results of this or that test can

be applied to a whole essential oil or to a wide range of skin types ..

is misleading marketing hype. Understanding such tests requires reading

with an open mind and no hidden agenda. Attempts to apply the results

of such tests across the board requires the use of smoke and mirrors.

 

If one really wants to understand such test results .. they have to

approach it like they were trying to eat an elephant .. they gotta go

slow and do it bite at a time. ;-)

 

Why do I say this? Because they have to consider all of the factors and

variables when reviewing the results.

 

SOME of the MANY Factors and Variables not mentioned yet in transdermal

testing are .. accumulation of dead cells, hydration of the skin, age of

the skin, climate the person has been exposed to, temperature of the

skin, thickness of the skin, sex, race, health of the skin, viscosity

and composition of the solution, and on and on and on. Any one of these

can result in a different outcome when tested a second time.

 

> A documentary on chemicals in the home on mainstream UK TV

> had an expert claim that when we put a cosmetic cream or

> lotion on our skin we absorb 60% of the product into our

> bloodstream. 60% is an awful lot of product.

 

The statement this so-called " expert " made shows that s/he is far

from being an expert. Martin's post is one folks should pay close

attention to .. but I'll add a few points.

 

" Experts " on most TV programs are rarely experts. There will be

exceptions but normally we can get a fair idea of their level of

expertise by noting their credentials. For example, the so-called

military and security experts CNN often uses to justify their take on

issues .. I know a few of these " experts " and that they are NOT!

 

Other " experts " are promoting something .. a couple of pill pushers and

one ex-pill pusher come to mind .. they might have been well trained in

a particular area of medicine .. but now they are pushing natural

products as if their formal training and expertise focused on the

products they are marketing.

 

To claim that 60% of " something " absorbs is ridiculous .. because that

" something " is not specified. There are some chemical components that

(without enhancers) might have a higher than 60% rate of absorption ..

Methyl salicylate comes to mind. Others show minute absorption with no

noticeable effect .. like Carvacrol.

 

All Enhancers are not synthetic .. some are natural .. many fatty acids

enhance penetration .. Olive Oil (Oleic acid) and Squalene come to mind

but .. which of the many chemical components in an Essential Oil does

this enhancer assist in absorption? The answer is those that we would

prefer to not absorb because they are (in most cases) potential sensitizers.

 

Certain chemicals in some Essential Oils have been shown to be effective

enhancers .. more on that later .. but read it closely and please don't

try to pull more out of the studies than is actually there.

 

We must listen and read well when dealing with studies on absorption

because many marketers " cherry pick " details in such research and use

only that data that supports what they are pushing. When dealing with

absorption, the buzz words to look for .. or for the absence of .. are

Drug/Chemical Penetration Enhancers! Last time I checked there were

more than 300 of them used by pharmaceutical companies .. and the lion's

share of them have traditionally been used to counter/assist in problems

such as .. skin diseases, arthritis, hemorrhoids, cold, flu, sinusitis

and migraine headaches .. though lately they are also using them in

contraception, hormone replacement therapy and smoking cessation.

 

The scientific test results I have reviewed that deal with absorption,

necessarily have narrow and fixed goals .. they are looking for ways to

enhance penetration of a particular chemical that is deemed to be

therapeutic. The parameters are narrow because it would be a waste of

time and money to extrapolate results to justify conclusions .. the test

would be considered invalid under those conditions. This is not to say

that some Pharmaceutical companies do NOT finance sloppy research ..

they have been known to do this for financial gain.

 

Also .. initial testing is rarely conducted on human skin .. preferred

choice is often hairless mouse skin .. and then there is an assumption

that the results of the tests apply to human skin .. so they put the

product on the market and use humans to produce real data. Though we

might disagree with this type of research .. I reckon its really the

only way they can test it.

 

I have the results of one test that was seeking an effective Penetration

Enhancer for Estradiol .. they used the following WHOLE Essential Oils

at 10% dilution in Propylene Glycol: Cajeput, Cardamom, Melissa,

Myrtle, Niaouli and Orange. Only Niaouli proved to be effective ..

meaning .. all Essential Oils don't produce the same results in

assisting penetration of a particular chemical. But also .. which of

the particular chemical(s) components of the Niaouli actually enhanced

delivery of that particular agent? If they want to narrow it down and

learn this .. its gonna cost one heckuva lot of money because they must

isolate and test each of the hundreds of chemicals in the Niaouli.

 

And .. because Niaouli proved to be an effective enhancer for Estradiol

does not mean it will produce the same results with another chemical.

 

In another test .. Eucalyptus globulus turned out to be the effective

Penetration Enhancer for a particular chemical. Again, which of the

chemicals in the Eucalyptus did the trick? And .. if they knew that ..

would that same chemical deliver a different agent in the same manner?

 

Folks in AT should not assume that this or that oil can absorb .. they

must look at tests like those above with a microscope .. not a set of

binoculars.

 

So .. we gotta conclude that SOME chemicals in SOME Essential Oils can

enhance the penetration of SOME isolated chemicals. But .. we rarely

know WHICH of the chemicals in the EO is doing this because the typical

EO is composed of many hundreds of chemicals .. in order to determine

which of the chemicals in that EO is actually enhancing penetration of a

single chemical .. there would be a need for hundreds of tests. Its not

practical .. not economically responsible.

 

So .. if we accept that only a fraction .. large or small fraction .. of

an EO is going to absorb .. we are accepting (rightly so) that the WHOLE

Essential Oil will NOT absorb.

 

If we accept that the WHOLE Essential Oil will NOT absorb and we still

want to hang onto the idea that application of EO to this or that body

part will get it to the blood stream .. then we are saying there is no

need to ensure use of high quality, pure (unadulterated) Essential Oils

in the first place because we're not gonna get the full benefits of the

natural synergy of the WHOLE oil in the second place.

 

And .. those who still believe in the benefits of EO absorption should

probably not waste their money on natural products .. they maybe should

purchase the Over The Counter medications that contain extracted or

synthesized chemical components of plants that are laced with penetration

enhancers. ;-)

 

And .. maybe Aromatherapy as it pertains to dermal application is a

bunch of Hoo Doo so we should stop talking about it. ;-)

 

Truth is .. AT as it pertains to dermal application is a bunch of Hoo

Doo!! It matters not if an EO is rubbed on the head, stomach, foot or

ass .. the volatile molecules of that EO will rise and they will be

present in the air and they will be being taken into the body through

the olfactory system .. and that is what Aroma Therapy is all about~!

 

> I seem to recall there was a thread on absorption of essential oils

> into the skin which the general viewpoint was that only a very small

> amount of chemical components from the EO's could penetrate the outer

> skin.

 

Yes ma'am .. you are perzackly correct.

 

> Surely this claim is incorrect or am I missing something

> here? I would appreciate any comments on this please.

 

The claim is incorrect .. and it is ridiculous .. and it shows that the

person who made it is NOT an expert in this area.

 

> Many thanks

 

Fer'shur.

 

> Dawn

 

Y'all have a good one .. and keep smiling. :-)

 

Butch http://www.AV-AT.com

[Guest guest]

Hi Butch,

 

Your long and detailed reply is very much appreciated. I have read

with interest what you had to say and it all makes very good sense. I

will have to read it again (several times) to be able to 'absorb' it

all (Pardon the pun!)

 

Basically the lady WAS making a broad statement that WAS incorrect and

WAS ridiculous. Unfortunately this is exactly the type of scenario

which causes people to believe such claims as it was on a reputable

programme going out to millions of viewers.

 

As a matter of interest, how many words per minute do you type??

 

Regards

 

Dawn

 

 

 

> scope that it is IMPOSSIBLE to make broad statements .. such as 60% of

> this or that will penetrate. Testing is necessarily narrow in scope and

 

 

> The claim is incorrect .. and it is ridiculous .. and it shows that the

> person who made it is NOT an expert in this area.

>