An Examination of the Phenol???Croton Oil Peel: Part IV. Face Peel Results with Different Concentrations of Phenol and Croton Oil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Part IV of this examination of the phenol-croton oil peel, the author presents peeling solutions using phenol in concentrations between 16% and 50% as the carrier for croton oil. Previously, in Part I, the author showed that phenol alone in concentrations of less than 50% has no significant peeling effect on the skin in the absence of taping. All of these formulas are dependent on the addition of croton oil for their peeling action. A topographic map of the face is presented that divides the face into the zones that the author believes are best treated with different strengths of croton oil. Five patients peeled between late 1992 and late 1995 were chosen as examples to illustrate the effect of different strengths of croton oil between 0.25% and 2.78%. The author has documented their immediate postoperative course photographically to show the effect of the different concentrations. It is clinically apparent that peels using croton oil between 0.25% and 0.5% generally heal within 7 days; peels between 0.6% and 1.0% usually heal within 9 or 10 days, and peels using concentrations higher than 1% heal later and have some risk of pigmentation loss. Peels using croton oil concentrations at 2% and above almost always have pigmentation loss and have healing delays in areas other than the thick skin of the lower nose and perioral area. The practical clinical formulas distributed at the time of the presentation of this article at the 1996 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery in Orlando, Florida, entitled "Heresy Phenol Formulas--1996," are provided here. These have been used in both the United States and Europe over the past few years. A metric standard for drop size is suggested at 0.04 ml. This relates to the drop size used clinically over the years to measure croton oil. The adoption of this unit will make formulas around the world easier to calculate and compare. The author has produced a metric formula using the suggested standard size drop for croton oil. This uses 35% phenol as the carrier and provides the same range of treatment dilutions as the 1996 "Heresy Phenol Formulas." The need for research into "carriers" and solvents for croton oil is pointed out. Despite what is not known about how it works, the combination of croton seed extract and phenol has been a success story in providing facial rejuvenation from the 1920s to the present. The croton oil-phenol peel in its many formulas still sets the standard for facial rejuvenation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".