Occupationally Induced Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Methylchloroisothiazolinone/Methylisothiazolinone among Water Bottle Plant Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) allergy has increased for the last decade, mostly not only because of high concentrations in cosmetics but also because of its use as a biocide in industrial settings. OBJECTIVE: We report an outbreak of allergic contact dermatitis in 8 workers at a water bottling plant secondary to excess levels of MCI/MI in the cooling system, found to be at levels 5 times the manufacturer's recommendations. METHODS: Of 15 workers in the plastic bottle manufacturing area, 8 developed dermatitis, and 4 were referred for patch testing using a 100-allergen panel applied and interpreted in the standardized method according to the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. RESULTS: Four workers had a positive reaction to MCI/MI. An investigation at the plant revealed that the concentration of MCI/MI was 365 ppm. The manufacturer's recommended level was 48 ppm. The cooling system was subsequently flushed, and biocide levels decreased to recommended levels. Afterward, all the affected workers experienced clearance of their allergic contact dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational sensitization to MCI/MI is on the rise, in this instance, because of excess levels in the cooling system. Our findings demonstrate the continued need for awareness of the allergenicity of this preservative in the occupational setting.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".