This letter to the editor screens ingredient lists. After products that differed only by pack size were collapsed, 31 and 44 unique baby wipe products were identified at two retailers, and none of the lists that could be read contained methylisothiazolinone or another isothiazolinone. The letter contrasts that with lotions and sunscreens from the same retailers, where methylisothiazolinone was still listed: 6.6 percent (4/61) and 5.4 percent (3/55) of unique lotions, and 12.2 percent (6/49) and 6.8 percent (3/44) of sunscreens. A figure of 100 ppm in the file is the historical leave-on methylisothiazolinone level discussed in the adjacent text, not a metal concentration. Retailer names are omitted.
Key numbers
Baby wipes: 31 and 44 unique products, no listed methylisothiazolinone on readable lists (five lists unavailable). Lotions: 4/61 and 3/55. Sunscreens: 6/49 and 3/44. No heavy-metal assay.
Methods (brief)
Ingredient-list survey of best-selling products. Not a laboratory metal analysis. The PDF is a fragment.
Evidence fitness
The counts support a statement about preservative labelling on baby wipes versus leave-on products in that screen. They do not support metal occurrence.
Limitations
Fragment file. Byline missing. Five wipe lists were unavailable. Percentages are label prevalence, not measured methylisothiazolinone and not metals.
Related evidence
Update history
No substantive edit history is available in this build. The full commit record is available in git.