Pyrethrins and Pyrethrosin Content in Commercial Allergen Extracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pyrethrins are the insecticidally active components of pyrethrum extract, derived from flowers of Chrysanthemum cinerariifolium and used in commercial and consumer insecticide products. Most dermal testing performed with pyrethrum extracts was done before current refined pyrethrum concentrate became available (before 1967). OBJECTIVE: We analyzed presently commercially available pyrethrum allergen extracts to determine the concentration of pyrethrins and the putative sensitizer pyrethrosin. METHODS: Six commercial pyrethrum allergen extracts were purchased from four major allergen suppliers and analyzed for pyrethrin I and pyrethrosin by using a capillary gas chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization detector. RESULTS: The commercial pyrethrum allergen extracts contained no detectable pyrethrins or pyrethrosin. In comparison, the pyrethrum standard provided by the McLaughlin Gormely King Company, a major refiner of pyrethrum, contained 20% pyrethrins and 0.49% pyrethrosin. No compounds observed in the chromatogram of the refined pyrethrum concentrate were present in the allergen extracts. CONCLUSIONS: Caution should be used when interpreting the results of tests performed with current pyrethrum allergen extracts because pyrethrins and pyrethrosin may not be present. Moreover, unknown components such as high-molecular-weight proteins or other impurities that may cause dermal reactions could be present in significant amounts.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".