Antiirritant Properties of Polyols and Amino Acids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antiirritants are used in cosmetic products to prevent or to treat skin irritations that arise during daily life. Data were published earlier on the efficacy of the best-known humectant, glycerol, in reducing irritation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of different polyols (including glycerol, xylitol, and mannitol) and the amino acids taurine and glycine on sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS)-induced skin irritation. METHODS: Healthy adult volunteers were patch-tested with 0.1% SLS in the presence or absence of one or another polyol or amino acid. Skin reactions were evaluated via measurements of transepidermal water loss (TEWL). RESULTS: Glycerol and xylitol significantly suppressed the SLS-induced increase in TEWL, whereas mannitol had no effect on the SLS-induced skin irritation. Taurine also inhibited the SLS-induced increase in TEWL, but glycine was not effective in reducing the SLS-induced irritative response. CONCLUSION: Similar to the action of the well-known antiirritant glycerol, SLS-induced skin irritation is suppressed by xylitol and taurine. These results suggest that these agents might also be effective in preventing irritative dermatitis.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".